Hofmann Injunctions in civil law - uni-muenchen.de · 2019. 4. 3. · 03.04.2019 3 PROPRIETOR...

03.04.2019

1

INJUNCTIONS IN CIVIL LAW

Prof. Dr. Franz Hofmann, LL.M. (Cambridge)

Franz Hofmann

Franz Hofmann Franz Hofmann

03.04.2019

2

FUNCTIONS

Consequences of injunctions

• Enjoin defendant from doing something

• Law and Economics

• Failure of amortisation

• Switching costs

• Recall of products

Prevention

Punishment?

Franz Hofmann

Tool for

negotiations

Franz Hofmann

STORY OF INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

PROPRIETOR INFRINGER

Franz Hofmann

STARTING POINT…

∗ Obligation to refrain from doing something

∗


Franz Hofmann

duty

STRUCTURE OF INJUNCTIVE RELIEF


∗

03.04.2019

3


Franz Hofmann

duty

order



∗

EUROPEAN VIEW

Art. 130 (Trademark Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

Sanctions

(1) Where an EU trade mark court finds that the defendant has infringed or threatenedto infringe an EU trade mark, it shall, unless there are special reasons for not doing

so, issue an order prohibiting the defendant from proceeding with the acts which

infringed or would infringe the EU trade mark. It shall also take such measures in

accordance with its national law as are aimed at ensuring that this prohibition is

complied with.

Franz Hofmann


Franz Hofmann

duty

order

claim



∗

CLAIMS AS RIGHTS (SUBSTANTIVE LAW)

Section 194 Civil Code (“BGB”)

Subject-matter of limitation

(1) The right to demand that another person does or refrains from an act (claim) is subject to limitation.

Franz Hofmann

03.04.2019

4

PROCEDURAL ROOTS


Right to a name

If the right of a person to use a name is disputed by another person, or if the interest ofthe person entitled to the name is injured by the unauthorised use of the same name

by another person, the person entitled may require the other to remove the

infringement. If further infringements are to be feared, the person entitled may

seek a prohibitory injunction.


Claim on account of interference with possession

(1) If the possessor is disturbed in his possession by unlawful interference, he may

require the disturber to remove the disturbance. If further disturbances are to be

feared, the possessor may seek a prohibitory injunction. (…)


Claim for removal and injunction

(1) If the ownership is interfered with by means other than removal or retention of

possession, the owner may require the disturber to remove the interference. If further

interferences are to be feared, the owner may seek a prohibitory injunction.

(2) The claim is excluded if the owner is obliged to tolerate the interference.

Franz Hofmann

PROCEDURAL ROOTS


Right to a name

If the right of a person to use a name is disputed by another person, or if the interest ofthe person entitled to the name is injured by the unauthorised use of the same name

by another person, the person entitled may require the other to remove the

infringement. If further infringements are to be feared, the person entitled may

seek a prohibitory injunction.

„Sind weitere Beeinträchtigungen zu besorgen, so kann er auf Unterlassung klagen.“


Claim on account of interference with possession

(1) If the possessor is disturbed in his possession by unlawful interference, he may

require the disturber to remove the disturbance. If further disturbances are to be

feared, the possessor may seek a prohibitory injunction. (…)

„Sind weitere Störungen zu besorgen, so kann der Besitzer auf Unterlassung klagen.“


Claim for removal and injunction

(1) If the ownership is interfered with by means other than removal or retention of

possession, the owner may require the disturber to remove the interference. If further

interferences are to be feared, the owner may seek a prohibitory injunction.

(2) The claim is excluded if the owner is obliged to tolerate the interference.

„Sind weitere Beeinträchtigungen zu besorgen, so kann er auf Unterlassung klagen.“

Franz Hofmann


Franz Hofmann

duty

order



∗


Franz Hofmann

duty

claim



∗

03.04.2019

5

“INJUNCTIONS” IN IP

Section 97 Copyright Act

Right to require cessation of infringement and to damages

(1) Any person who infringes copyright or any other right protected under this Act maybe required by the injured party to eliminate the infringement or, where there is a risk

of repeated infringement, may be required by the injured party to cease and

desist. Entitlement to prohibit the infringer from future infringement shall also exist

where the risk of infringement exists for the first time. (…)

Section 139 Patent Act

(1) Any person who uses a patented invention contrary to sections 9 to 13 may, in the

event of the risk of recurrent infringement, be sued by the aggrieved party forcessation and desistance. This right may also be asserted in the event of the riskof a first-time infringement. (…)

Section 14 Trade Mark Act

Exclusive right of the proprietor of a trade mark, right to an injunction, compensation

claim

(5) Anyone using a sign in contravention of subs. 2 to 4 may be required by the

proprietor of the trade mark to refrain therefrom if there is a danger of recurrence.

The right shall also exist if there is a risk of a contravention occurring for the first

time. (…)

Franz Hofmann



(1) Any person who infringes copyright or any other right protected under this Act may be required

by the injured party to eliminate the infringement or, where there is a risk of repeatedinfringement, may be required by the injured party to cease and desist. Entitlement to

prohibit the infringer from future infringement shall also exist where the risk of infringementexists for the first time. (…)

„bei Wiederholungsgefahr auf Unterlassung in Anspruch genommen werden“


(1) Any person who uses a patented invention contrary to sections 9 to 13 may, in the event of therisk of recurrent infringement, be sued by the aggrieved party for cessation and desistance.

This right may also be asserted in the event of the risk of a first-time infringement. (…)



Exclusive right of the proprietor of a trade mark, right to an injunction, compensation claim

(5) Anyone using a sign in contravention of subs. 2 to 4 may be required by the proprietor of thetrade mark to refrain therefrom if there is a danger of recurrence. The right shall also exist if

there is a risk of a contravention occurring for the first time. (…)



Franz Hofmann


Franz Hofmann

duty

claim



∗

Franz Hofmann

duty

claim



∗

03.04.2019

6

GENERAL REQUIREMENTS “INJUNCTIONS”

Requirements injunctive relief

(right to demand that another person refrains from an act)

• Infringement

• No defences (= limitations and exceptions)

• Danger of recurrence (“Wiederholungsgefahr”); risk of first-time

infringement (“Erstbegehungsgefahr”)

• No discretion of courts, no fault requirement

• Nature of the remedy: claim within the realm of substantive law

instead of court order

Franz Hofmann




(1) Any person who infringes copyright or any other right protected under this Act maybe required by the injured party to eliminate the infringement or, where there is a risk

of repeated infringement, may be required by the injured party to cease and

desist. Entitlement to prohibit the infringer from future infringement shall also exist

where the risk of infringement exists for the first time. (…)


(1) Any person who uses a patented invention contrary to sections 9 to 13 may, in the

event of the risk of recurrent infringement, be sued by the aggrieved party forcessation and desistance. This right may also be asserted in the event of the riskof a first-time infringement. (…)


Exclusive right of the proprietor of a trade mark, right to an injunction, compensation

claim

(5) Anyone using a sign in contravention of subs. 2 to 4 may be required by the

proprietor of the trade mark to refrain therefrom if there is a danger of recurrence.

The right shall also exist if there is a risk of a contravention occurring for the first

time. (…)

Franz Hofmann




• Infringement







Franz Hofmann


Franz Hofmann

duty

order

claim



∗

03.04.2019

7

Franz Hofmann

duty

order

claim

CASCADE OF OBLIGATIONS


∗

Franz Hofmann

duty

order

claim

CASCADE OF OBLIGATIONS


∗




• Infringement







Franz Hofmann

Federal Court of Justice (“BGH”), 10.5.2016 – X ZR 114/13 – Wärmetauscher (→ “grace period”)

GOOD FAITH

Franz Hofmann

03.04.2019

8

PROPORTIONALITY


Exclusion of the duty of performance

(1) A claim for performance is excluded to the extent that performance is impossiblefor the obligor or for any other.

(2) The obligor may refuse performance to the extent that performance requires

expense and effort which, taking into account the subject matter of the obligation andthe requirements of good faith, is grossly disproportionate to the interest in

performance of the obligee. When it is determined what efforts may reasonably be

required of the obligor, it must also be taken into account whether he is responsible for

the obstacle to performance.

Section 100 Copyright Act (“UrhG”)

Pecuniary compensation

Where the injuring party acts neither intentionally nor negligently, he may, in order to

avert the assertion of the claims under sections 97 and 98, pay pecuniary

compensation to the injured party if the fulfilment of the claims would cause

disproportionate harm and the injured party can be expected to accept pecuniarycompensation. The compensation shall total that amount which would constitute

equitable remuneration were the right to be contractually granted. Payment of such

compensation shall be equivalent to granting the injuring party permission to exploit

the right to the customary extent.

Franz Hofmann

BALANCING VIA REMEDIES?

Legislator´s ideaUnderenforcement Overenforcement

Franz Hofmann

PROPORTIONALITY

Der Ausschluss des Unterlassungsanspruchs in bestimmten

Durchsetzungskonstellationen ist durchweg systemimmanent

→ Die Analyse des Privatrechts als Rechtsbehelfsmodell schärft den Blick dafür, dass

sich sämtliche Begrenzungen der Rechtsfolge Unterlassen (einschließlich

„Schrankenregelungen“) auf einen allgemeinen Grundsatz zurückführen lassen. Die

unterschiedlichen dogmatischen Erscheinungsformen zur Begrenzung der

Rechtsdurchsetzung sind nichts anderes als Ausfluss des Prinzips, dass Rechte

differenziert durchgesetzt werden. Auch ohne ausdrückliche spezialgesetzliche

Rechtsgrundlage können daher im Einzelfall namentlich Unterlassungsansprüche

gestützt auf das Rechtsprinzip der Rechtsfolgendifferenzierung versagt werden.

Einschränkungen obliegen dem Richter, der diese mittels im materiellen Rechtangelegten Interessenabwägungen, nicht durch „Ermessen“, gleichsam feststellen

muss. (Hofmann, Der Unterlassungsanspruch als Rechtsbehelf, 2017, S. 462–465)

Franz Hofmann


Franz Hofmann

duty

order

claim



∗

03.04.2019

9

Franz Hofmann

THE STORY GOES ON….


Franz Hofmann

duty

execution

order

claim



∗

EXECUTION

Section 890 Code of Civil Procedure

Forcing the debtor to cease and desist from actions, or to tolerate actions

(1) Should the debtor violate his obligation to cease and desist from actions, or to tolerate

actions to be taken, the court of first instance hearing the case is to sentence him for

each count of the violation, upon the creditor filing a corresponding petition, to a coercive

fine and, for the case that such payment cannot be obtained, to coercive detention or

coercive detention of up to six (6) months. The individual coercive fine may not be levied in

an amount in excess of 250,000 euros, and the coercive detention may not be longer than a

total of two (2) years. (…)

Franz Hofmann

EXECUTION

Execution

• Purpose: Influence on the defendant´s behaviour

• Court proceedings: cf. Sec. 890 Code of Civil Procedure

Franz Hofmann

03.04.2019

10

EXECUTION

Section 890 Code of Civil Procedure

Forcing the debtor to cease and desist from actions, or to tolerate actions

(1) Should the debtor violate his obligation to cease and desist from actions, or to tolerate

actions to be taken, the court of first instance hearing the case is to sentence him for

each count of the violation, upon the creditor filing a corresponding petition, to a coercive

fine and, for the case that such payment cannot be obtained, to coercive detention or

coercive detention of up to six (6) months. The individual coercive fine may not be levied in

an amount in excess of 250,000 euros, and the coercive detention may not be longer than a

total of two (2) years. (…)

Section 97a Copyright Act

Notification

(1) The injured party shall notify the infringer before instituting proceedings in court to desist

from infringement and shall give him the opportunity to settle the dispute by entering into

an obligation to desist from infringement accompanied by an equitable contractual

penalty.

(3) Where the notification is rightful and meets the conditions set out in subsection (2), first

sentence, numbers 1 to 4, reimbursement of expenses necessarily incurred may be

demanded. (…)

Franz Hofmann

EXECUTION

Execution

• Purpose: Influence on the defendant´s behaviour

• Court proceedings: cf. Sec. 890 Code of Civil Procedure

• Out of court: Cease-and-desist letters → penalty clause

Franz Hofmann

CONTRACT LAW


Duties arising from an obligation

(1) By virtue of an obligation an obligee is entitled to claim performance from the obligor. The performance may also consist in forbearance.

(2) An obligation may also, depending on its contents, oblige each party to take account of

the rights, legal interests and other interests of the other party.

Franz Hofmann


Franz Hofmann

duty

CONTRACT LAW


∗

penalty clause

03.04.2019

11


Franz Hofmann

duty

execution

order

claim

THE END…


∗

Franz Hofmann

THE END…

THANK YOU!

Franz Hofmann • Chair of Private Law, Intellectual Property and Technology Law • [email protected]

Hofmann Injunctions in civil law - uni-muenchen.de · 2019. 4. 3. · 03.04.2019 3 PROPRIETOR...

Documents

Transcript of Hofmann Injunctions in civil law - uni-muenchen.de · 2019. 4. 3. · 03.04.2019 3 PROPRIETOR...